• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Neck-Thru designs really inferior to Bolt-on ??

A

alienstarguest

May 30, 2009
315
120
#1
Perhaps an often visited topic, bolt-on vs. neck-thru, please examine the comments of a professional bassist and let me know what you think.
This is a statement by Glenn Letsch from his book Good Bass Players Should Know (2008). Letsch was a session and touring bassist for some prominent acts. In it he briefly extols the virtues of Bold-On necks. I was wondering if you guys could comment.

“Basses with bolt-on necks sound better than neck-thru basses. They are punchier, the notes sound thicker, there is more definition, and the tone is better. The main reason for this is the coupling effect that occurs when a bolt-on neck is wedged into the heel pocket of the bass body. Sound generated from the neck transfers to the heel pocket. If you combine the thickness of the end of the neck with the thickness of the heel pocket, there is approximately 2 to 2 ½ inches of wood mass through which to transfer the note vibrations.”

He goes onto say how when he was on tour with Robin Trower, a bass manufacturer was able to get him to play a high end neck-thru bass during a gig. He said it sounded so thin and punchless, that Trower himself requested that he go back to his Fender for upcoming shows.

.........................................

As for me personally, the few times I myself had played a neck-thru bass extensively, I was not using my ‘Prime’ amp rig, so I didn’t think my comparison would be fair. So, I don’t know. I had always heard opposite of what this guy is saying….or maybe that was just commenting on Sustain of neck-thrus.

In addition to giving your comments, do you think if his statements are true that it only applies to bass guitars or six strings as well ?
 
#2
I don't know... I own a Firebird, and owned a Carvin neck through electric guitar back in the day. I own a lot of bolt on a glued in necks also, my three bass guitars are all bolt on, though.

The sustain that was claimed in the past for neck through designed guitars isn't really true, but I don't find they have a lot less.

Kind of a non-issue... it probably depends on a guitar by guitar basis. Judging what one guy said one time about one show with one bass is making a whole lot out of a little.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Need2KnowBasses
#3
His logic is flawed. However, a bolt on can sound as good as a neck through given there's so many variables involved. But generally, most neck-throughs will have better tone.

----------
edit: as far as the tone goes that is described as transferring vibrations from neck to heel. No man-made joint conducts pressure waves better than a continuous piece of wood. Every bit of glue, every bolt, every compressed fiber, every micron of gap between bolted pieces will change or redirect the vibration, thus add distortion to the tone. A bad or mediocre bolt joint can wreck the upper harmonic content and sustain, but a neck through made of less dense, softer, more bendable wood will do the same.

My point was that there are more mediocre bolt-on joints in the world than neck-thrus built of shoddy wood.
I apologize for my careless use of the subjective term "better tone"
-----------
Again, it all depends.

The one advantage a bolt-on design has over neck through is from a maintenance perspective. If a roadie or an airline snaps the neck on your bass, you only have to replace the neck... and the roadie.
 
#6
I don't believe you can reduce the sound of a bass as to whether it uses one or another system of attaching the neck. Apparently the bassist in question is convinced that he is right, and his opinion is worth exactly what you paid for it.

Personally, I have owned only one neck-through bass out of 10 (not counting a couple of ABGs) and I'm quite happy with my Fender, Godin and MusicMan bolt-ons. That said, I think it's a real stretch to say these brands sound better than my Carvin (the only neck-through) because it didn't have screws holding the neck on. The Carvin was unsatisfactory for other reasons -- and, in fact, it was the only bass I've owned that needed truss rod adjustment more often than hardly ever.:D

It's the other characteristics of the basses I still own that make them my favorites: sound, ergonomics, appearance and so on. I certainly didn't buy them on the basis of neck attachment.
 
#7
Nah, not at all.

A neck through let you have a longer neck, that will vibrate better. It also help removing dead spot and well, that neck heel is very nice.

I looked him and ... he is a rocker ... and a NT seem to suit jazz, RNB and extrem metal more. Rock music is dominated by Fender and I think he was looking for that Fender thing in something different.
 
#9
wvbass said:
His statements don't make any sense.
Click to expand...

It does if the NT bass he had was crappy sounding.

I read the same book. It is pretty good for basic reading.

He also swears by sorbthane balls cut in half and glued to a board between his tube heads and cabinets to extend tube life.

One thing that bugged me was that he plugged his own brand of basses throughout. Named Pipe-something or other.

I have a NT, a bunch of bolt ons and a set neck is being built. To say one type of construction is universally better for every musician is just idiotic IMO.
 
#13
I'm not sure about NT vs BO, however out of my basses, the 2 heaviest ones sound the best and have the longest sustain. One of them is NT, the other one is BO. So, subjectively for me, the weight really matters, whereas NT or not is not that important.
 
#18
alienstarguest said:
This is a statement by Glenn Letsch from his book Good Bass Players Should Know (2008). Letsch was a session and touring bassist for some prominent acts. In it he briefly extols the virtues of Bold-On necks. I was wondering if you guys could comment.
Click to expand...
THAT was the guy's name!

I've been trying to place this guy for years. Has to be the same person.

I don't think I've ever seen so many unsubstantiated, arbitrary assertions from one guy in one place in a commercially-published book as in some instructional manual from this character I came across years ago. It was just jam-packed with TB-grade bubba talk.

I also have never heard as many gross, painful dead spots as in his accompanying instructional CD, played on one of his "own line" of fugly P knockoffs. It was absolutely epic.

I don't necessarily agree/disagree with this particular claim, but if I was looking for a bunch of categorical proclamations with no compelling explanations to back them up, I could get that off of any brainless floor hack at GC. Or here. ;)

[edit:]Was this the same book in which he asserted we all had to go bi-amp and that Crate and Peavey gear was awesome?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back